The Select Board will meet to set the tax rate for FY09 tonight at 6:30 PM at the Town Hall.
Last year, the Board decided to split the tax rate with residents paying less than the base rate and businesses paying 140% of the base rate. I will vote tonight to continue that split. My reasoning for that stance is two fold, ...
... first, the tax burden had been steadily shifted over the years to fall more heavily upon the residents than the business of Dartmouth. Read this post to get the details on why that occurred. Secondly, I think it is good policy to avoid large swings in the tax rate so that taxpayers can adequately plan their payment, both business and residents.
Both business and residents will see a larger than the normal 2-1/2% tax increase due to the $2.1 million override passed last year. Single family homes will have their tax bill increase 6.4% and business taxes will increase about 9% from the FY08 number.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Select Board to set tax rate tonight
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
33 comments:
Thanks for staying with the split tax. It will be better for residents in Dartmouth right now.
I agree with the decision of the board not to re-new Gagne's contract. This is something that is long overdue. Dartmouth needs new leadership!
Bill would have been wrong to announce the details of the meeting that took place regarding Michael Gagne's contract. It was held in Executive Session and the Mass General Laws state that nothing discussed in these sessions is public information until all the issues are resolved. He and others refusing to comment on the details or reveal information are following the letter of the law, as they should.
There is no attempt here on anyone's part to purposely wihhold information or "keep secrets," so there is no lack of transparency issue here.
If Bill chose to delete posts, it might well have been to squelch any furthering of such misguided accusations and belief that there is some sort of "conspiracy to cover something up."
Well I guess that answers my question. Good posts and atta boys on the non-renewal are ok. Questions about it are not.
How can you ask questions about something that cannot be discussed and expect to get an answer? HELLO!
I HOPE YOU RE-LOOK AT IACAPONI'S CONTRACT. He is not the best and brightest planner.
go two tier.
What I posted that was deleted was a question about the fairness about leaving positive posts about the non-renewal on the blog but removing posts that stated the removal was not a good thing. SImple fairness in what gets reported and what gets deleted. Not that I have any faith that this post will remain up.
It all sounds like dirty politics to me. You will not replace the knowledge this man has of the town and how it operates. You may disagree with his work ethic or positions but no one will hold a candle to his loyalty to the town and the hard work he has put in. I'm sure you will find a new stooge to follow your direction. The only problem is, the direction is downward. Ed, take the high road and resign before these piranha get you too.
This is the beginning of the end.
Thanks Bill for being the pompous individual you are. I just hope you take credit for the demise of this town.
The sky is falling! The sky is falling! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
OK, everyone, relax...
If our nation can hire a new president every four years, I think Dartmouth can hire a new exec. administrator. The select board did the right thing! Mike Gagne never had a lifetime appointment! This is the most positive thing Dartmouth has done in a long time!
These are the same people that elected Bush twice.
I'm not surprised that Trimble deleted contrary opinions while allowing those that match his thoughts and actions to remain. Trimble is a demagogue. That's what demagogues do. And there's nothing anyone can do about it.
Bill DID NOT state that he would delete "contrary opinions." What he stated was that he would delete "ANY REFERENCE" (caps mine) regarding the subject and discussion of the Executive Session, as he and others attending the Session are prohibited from divulging such information, under the Mass General Laws.
As far as "any reference" goes, without the facts (which will be publicized when the time is appropriate to do so) postings speculating on the nature of the issue, whether positive or negative, could well result in misinformation being spread around town. Rumors, gossip, and speculation do no one any good, so perhaps Bill's decision to delete "any reference" is based on that premise, as well as his inability to comment on the issue at this time. Why not attempt to stem misinformation, rumor, speculation, etc., before the actual facts are revealed. Do they actually help anyone?
Or is it just fun to bash someone?
'Why not attempt to stem misinformation, rumour, speculation...'
Why start now?
Unless I'm mistaken, I get the feeling that people want the details of the Executive Session NOW. They are confidential at this time. It is futile to insist that those involved divulge them. Any questions we have just cannot be answered immediately. This is not the personal decision of the SB. It is the Mass LAW. Why keep badgering?
Posters and letter writers offer their opinions on an issue/person and/or comment on actual facts. That is their right under the democratic system. But I guess at this point I, personally, see no sense and nothing positive about speculating on something none of us, with the exception of those present at the Executive Session, knows with any certainty what happened in the Session. Why make an unfortunate situation -- and it is unfortunate for both the individual involved and the town itself -- any worse?
My opinion only, however.
Bull! The man (Trimble) is censoring stuff that's critical of him, plain and simple.
Why then hasn't he "censored" comments and posts that were negative about him from the get-go?
Besides, what "stuff" has he said about the current issue that could be construed as being statements that would ultimately be "critical of him" for saying them?
Please. I have seen many critical comments regarding Bill Trimble on this blog and they have never been deleted. I think Mr. Trimble has a proven track record in this matter.
Thanks for voting for the split tax! I realize not all residents are in favor but it was the right decision for the residents and they make up the majority. Thanks!
I 100% understand Executive session and its role in govt. My question is very different. The employee who "leaked" the activities from that executive session in the email violated the law, as well as the public trust. What punishment will they (or should they) receive? especially since this employee was NOT present during the meeeting. Who else is a leak? The employee must have got the info from someoen that was present. Bill your thoughts....
The matter is increasingly in the public forum as you can see in this article. There were only 7 people in the room during the meeting. It is disapppointing to me that they did not respect the confidentiality of the subject matter until it could be resolved. I intend to post about that later.
It is troubling that this information was leaked out but now even more troubling is the commentary by a Selectman on the reason for termination as openly discussed in today's newspaper. 2 days ago the line was cant talk about it, "executive Session' today its on the front page. Very disappointing.
Select Board member Joe Michaud is a lawyer and I'm sure he only spoke because he knew he was within the law to speak now. He said the majority of the Board thinks Dartmouth should go in a new direction. No one blamed Mr. Gagne for anything as many are trying to say. I agree with the Board's decision and now it's time to move forward. This is not the big news story the S-Times is trying to make it out to be. Other towns choose not to re-new contracts all the time. Maybe some people in Dartmouth think our officials are there for life. Our town does not exist to support Mr. Gagne for life. Just my opinion!
Lawyers have been known to mis-speak. Perhaps he is within the law to say what he said in today's paper. As a lay person, non-lawyer, the quick flip from 'no comment' to 'here's the reason..new direction' bothers me. Just my opinion. Now I guess the lawyers will have to battle it out, no surprise there.
It's pretty clear in our town charter. I'm sure both lawyers will read it.
He's not being removed 'with cause' as described in the charter. His contract is just not being renewed so no cause is required as I read it. Not saying I agree but thats what it says.
Was there ever a performance review done of Mr Gagne? Any indication given the SB was not satisfied with the work he was doing? That's where some sense of fairness would come into play in my opinion. After 22 years on the job, I would hope our SB would at least have given Mike some notice that they were not happy with some aspect of his performance and a chance to change course to the 'new direction' desired. I mean even the most jaded town person would think this would be a fair thing to do? Was this done?
When people stay in positions as long as Mr. Gagne has, they think they own the job for life. It's not easy to give up that power and control. If he were an elected official, the residents could speak from the voting booth. We elect the Select Board to hire, fire, renew, or not-renew. It is their responsibility to act in the best interest of Dartmouth and I think they have. I have nothing against Mr. Gagne, but Dartmouth needs a change.
Still not sure if any performance reviews were done. Is'nt that part of the 'change' people have been asking for?
Can my question about performance reviews for Gagne be answered? It's not that difficult a question. If the answer is 'no' then the town and Gagne have been done a disservice no matter how you feel about the town needing a 'change'. After 20+ years of loyal service the man deserves some respect and a performance review and opportunity to correct deficiencies would be a part of that respectfulness. Please answer this question. Thank you.
WHAT ABOUT IT BILL??? convince me this move(possibly illegal)is in the best interests of Dartmouth not just the best interests of trimble , gilbert and michaud
I will not comment on matters directly regarding Mr. Gagne. See this post
Post a Comment